Explore the vast range of titles available.

\"Brill's Companion to the Reception of Cicero is a collection of essays by an international and interdisciplinary team of scholars that situates Cicero in the context of his use and abuse from antiquity to the present, and is intended to provide readers with several good reasons to return to the study of Cicero's writings with greater interest and respect. Contributors are: William H.F. Altman, Elisabeth Begemann, Caroline Bishop, JoAnn DellaNeva, Alex Dressler, Kathy Eden, Robert G. Ingram, Gâabor Kendeffy, Carlos Lâevy, Martin McLaughlin, Paul Allen Miller, Carl J. Richard, Matthew Joel Sharpe and John Oastler Ward\"--Provided by publisher.

Less than two years before his murder, Cicero created a catalogue of his philosophical writings that included dialogues he had written years before, numerous recently completed works, and even one he had not yet begun to write, all arranged in the order he intended them to be read, beginning with the introductory Hortensius, rather than in accordance with order of composition. Following the order of the De divinatione catalogue, William H. F. Altman considers each of Cicero's late works as part of a coherent philosophical project determined throughout by its author's Platonism. Locating the parallel between Plato's Allegory of the Cave and Cicero's \"Dream of Scipio\" at the center of Cicero's life and thought as both philosopher and orator, Altman argues that Cicero is not only \"Plato's rival\" (it was Quintilian who called him Platonis aemulus) but also a peerless guide to what it means to be a Platonist, especially since Plato's legacy was as hotly debated in his own time as it still is in ours. Distinctive of Cicero's late dialogues is the invention of a character named \"Cicero,\" an amiable if incompetent adherent of the New Academy whose primary concern is only with what is truth-like (veri simile). Following Augustine's lead, Altman reveals the deliberate inadequacy of this pose and argues that Cicero himself, the writer of dialogues who used \"Cicero\" as one of many philosophical personae, must always be sought elsewhere: in direct dialogue with the dialogues of Plato, the teacher he revered and whose Platonism he revived. The Revival of Platonism in Cicero's Late Philosophy: Platonis aemulus and the Invention of Cicero is a must read for anyone working in classical studies, ancient philosophy, ancient history, or the history of philosophy.

When careful consideration is given to Nietzsche’s critique of Platonism and to what he wrote about Bismarck, Kaiser Wilhelm, and to Germany’s place in “international relations” (die Große Politik), the philosopher’s carefully cultivated “pose of untimeliness” is revealed to be an imposture. As William H. F. Altman demonstrates, Nietzsche should be recognized as the paradigmatic philosopher of the Second Reich, the short-lived and equally complex German Empire that vanished in World War One. Since Nietzsche is a brilliant stylist whose seemingly disconnected aphorisms have made him notoriously difficult for scholars to analyze, Friedrich Wilhelm Nietzsche is presented in Nietzsche’s own style in a series of 155 brief sections arranged in five discrete “Books,” a structure modeled on Daybreak. All of Nietzsche’s books are considered in the context of the close and revealing relationship between “Friedrich Wilhelm Nietzsche” (named by his patriotic father after the King of Prussia) and the Second Reich. In “Preface to ‘A German Trilogy,’” Altman joins this book to two others already published by Lexington Books: Martin Heidegger and the First World War: Being and Time as Funeral Oration and The German Stranger: Leo Strauss and National Socialism.

In this book, William H. F. Altman argues that it is not order of composition but reading order that makes Euthyphro, Apology of Socrates, Crito, and Phaedo \"late dialogues,\" and shows why Plato's decision to interpolate the notoriously \"late\" Sophist and Statesman between Euthyphro and Apology deserves more respect from interpreters.

In this unique and important book, William Altman shines a light on the pedagogical technique of the playful Plato, especially his ability to create living discourses that directly address the student. Reviving an ancient concern with reconstructing the order in which Plato intended his dialogues to be taught as opposed to determining the order in which he wrote them, Altman breaks with traditional methods by reading Plato’s dialogues as a multiplex but coherent curriculum in which the Allegory of the Cave occupies the central place. His reading of Plato's Republic challenges the true philosopher to choose the life of justice exemplified by Socrates and Cicero by going back down into the Cave of political life for the sake of the greater Good.

Situating Cicero in the context of his use and abuse from antiquity to the present, an international and interdisciplinary team of scholars provides several good reasons to return to the study of his many writings with greater interest and respect.

If you’ve ever wondered why Plato staged Timaeus as a kind of sequel to Republic, or who its unnamed missing fourth might be; or why he joined Critias to Timaeus, and whether or not that strange dialogue is unfinished; or what we should make of the written critique of writing in Phaedrus, and of that dialogue’s apparent lack of unity; or what is the purpose of the long discussion of the One in the second half of Parmenides, and how it relates to the objections made to the Theory of Forms in its first half; or if the revisionists or unitarians are right about Philebus, and why its Socrates seems less charming than usual, or whether or not Cratylus takes place after Euthyphro, and whether its far-fetched etymologies accomplish any serious philosophical purpose; or why the philosopher Socrates describes in the central digression of Theaetetus is so different from Socrates himself; then you will enjoy reading the continuation of William H. F. Altman’s Plato the Teacher: The Crisis of the Republic (Lexington; 2012), where he considers the pedagogical connections behind “the post-Republic dialogues” from Timaeus to Theaetetus in the context of “the Reading Order of Plato’s dialogues.”

If you've ever wondered why Plato staged Timaeus as a kind of sequel to Republic, or who its unnamed missing fourth might be; or why he joined Critias to Timaeus, and whether or not that strange dialogue is unfinished; or what we should make of the written critique of writing in Phaedrus, and of that dialogue's apparent lack of unity; or what is the purpose of the long discussion of the One in the second half of Parmenides, and how it relates to the objections made to the Theory of Forms in its first half; or if the revisionists or unitarians are right about Philebus, and why its Socrates seems less charming than usual, or whether or not Cratylus takes place after Euthyphro, and whether its far-fetched etymologies accomplish any serious philosophical purpose; or why the philosopher Socrates describes in the central digression of Theaetetus is so different from Socrates himself; then you will enjoy reading the continuation of William H. F. Altman's Plato the Teacher: The Crisis of the Republic (Lexington; 2012), where he considers the pedagogical connections behind \"the post-Republic dialogues\" from Timaeus to Theaetetus in the context of \"the Reading Order of Plato's dialogues.\"

Leo Strauss's connection with Martin Heidegger and Carl Schmitt suggests a troubling proximity to National Socialism but a serious critique of Strauss must begin with F. H. Jacobi. While writing his dissertation on this apparently Christian opponent of the Enlightenment, Strauss discovered the tactical principles that would characterize his lifework: writing between the lines, a faith-based critique of rationalism, the deliberate secularization of religious language for irreligious purposes, and an \"all or nothing\" antagonism to middling solutions. Especially the latter is distinctive of his Zionist writings in the 1920s where Strauss engaged in an ongoing polemic against Cultural Zionism, attacking it first from an orthodox, and then from an atheist's perspective. In his last Zionist article (1929), Strauss mentions \"the Machiavellian Zionism of a Nordau that would not fear to use the traditional hope for a Messiah as dynamite.\" By the time of his \"change of orientation,\" National Socialism was being led by a nihilistic \"Messiah\" while Strauss had already radicalized Schmitt's \"political theology\" and Heidegger's deconstruction of the ontological Tradition. Central to Strauss's advance beyond the smartest Nazis is his \"Second Cave\" in which he claimed modern thought is imprisoned: only by escaping Revelation can we recover \"natural ignorance.\" By using pseudo-Platonic imagery to illustrate what anti-Semites called \"Jewification,\" Strauss attempted to annihilate the common ground, celebrated by Hermann Cohen, between Judaism and Platonism. Unlike those who attacked Plato for devaluing nature at the expense of the transcendent Idea, the émigré Strauss effectively employed a new \"Plato\" who was no more a Platonist than Nietzsche or Heidegger had been. Central to Strauss's \"Platonic political philosophy\" is the mysterious protagonist of Plato's Laws whom Strauss accurately recognized as the kind of Socrates whose fear of death would have caused him to flee the hemlock. Any reader who recognizes the unbridgeable gap between the real Socrates and Plato's Athenian Stranger will understand why \"the German Stranger\" is the principal theoretician of an atheistic re-enactment of religion, of which genus National Socialism is an ultra-modern species.